- (1.) In this criminal revision invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners who have been arraigned as accuseds in a FIR relating to offence punishable under Section 4D of the Land Reforms Act, 1995 has moved this Court for quashing of the same.
(2.) Mr. Utpal Majumdar, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in support of prayer for quashing urged as follows; (a) The FIR was lodged suppressing the correct facts and without any application of mind. (b) Before lodging of the FIR no show cause notice as contemplated in Section 4C of the Land Reforms Act was issued nor any opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners. (c) No person can be prosecuted under Section 4D without he being found to have violated Section 4C of the Act. (d) Not only no show cause notice was issued but there was also no formation of opinion and the FIR was lodged mechanically, which is not permissible under the law and without jurisdiction. (e) The petitioner has never changed the character of the land thus there cannot be any question of violation of Section 4C of the said Act and his prosecution under Section 4D of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. (f) Only allegation that have been made against the petitioners that they are making attempt to effect alteration of the area, character and mode of use of land. (g) The FIR should not have been lodged as Land and Land Reforms Department, Land Acquisition Wing on July 15, 2009 issued notification under Section 4 of the West Bengal Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and on October 29, 2009 issued declaration under Section 6 of the said Act in respect of the self same land. In reply to the submissions of Mr. Majumdar, Mr. Swapan Kumar Mullick for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing and submitted the grounds on which the petitioners are seeking quashing of the impugned FIR are not tenable in law. Mr. Mullick produced the Case Diary and further submitted that sufficient materials have been collected by the police to show the petitioners involvement in the commission of the alleged offences.
(3.) Heard the Learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. Perused the materials on record, as well as the Case Diary.;